The latest bombshell, which begs the question, “Do we have any secrets left?”

Intelligence officials have discovered sensitive national security information on Hillary Clinton’s server that goes beyond the “top secret” level, the intelligence community inspector general told lawmakers in a letter last week.

In a copy of the Jan. 14 correspondence obtained by POLITICO, Intelligence Community Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III told both the Senate Intelligence and Senate Foreign Relations committees that intelligence agencies found messages relating to what are known as “special access programs,” or SAP. That’s an even more restricted subcategory of sensitive compartmented information, or SCI, top secret national security information derived from sensitive intelligence sources.

Emphasis added.

If this selfish, imbecilic, entitled exemplar of our governing elites (God help us) doesn’t face prosecution for this, then equality before the law for all is dead in America.

A new report that Hillary Clinton’s personal server contained information about “special access programs” makes her handling of sensitive material “worse than what Snowden did,” Charles Krauthammer said tonight.

“What people have to understand is that there is nothing higher, more secret than an SAP,” Krauthammer said on Tuesday’s Special Report. “From some people I have talked to, this is worse than what Snowden did because he didn’t have access to SAP.”

“The reason it’s [so sensitive] is if it’s compromised, people die,” he said. “It also means that operations that have been embedded for years and years get destroyed and cannot be reconstituted. This is very serious.”

Emphasis added.

It’s hard for me to describe just how much that woman and her family –including her daughter, who seems to be a chip off the old money-grubbing block– disgust me. She was privy to the deepest, most sensitive secrets held by the government in trust for the American people, for our safety and prosperity in a dangerous world.

And yet she treated them like afterthoughts, with no regard to the consequences. The nation’s interests —our interests— were subordinated to her desire to avoid FOIA requests, to her Nixonian need for secrecy and control.

The closest Hillary Clinton should ever come to the Oval Office is on a bus passing nearby on its way to deliver her to federal prison.

House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R., Utah) filed an impeachment resolution on Tuesday against IRS Commissioner John Koskinen, the turnaround expert who was brought in to clean up the tax agency in 2013. Mr. Chaffetz was joined by 18 fellow Republicans.

The charges focus on the destruction of magnetic tapes that contained e-mails from Lois Lerner, the former agency executive whose office gave extra scrutiny to the groups.

“John Andrew Koskinen engaged in a pattern of deception that demonstrates his unfitness to serve as Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service,” the resolution says, focusing on Mr. Koskinen’s statements last year about the agency’s efforts to retrieve documents for congressional investigations. “Commissioner Koskinen made a series of false and misleading statements to Congress in contravention of his oath to tell the truth.”

“The IRS vigorously disputes the allegations in the resolution. We have fully cooperated with all of the investigations,” the agency said in a written statement.

Of course, the IRS also said there had been no high level coordinated efforts to harass conservative and libertarian groups applying for non-profit status in the run-up to the 2012 election, and then, when that was shown to be a lie, said they couldn’t find Lois Lerner’s emails. That was also shown to be a lie. During the whole of his time in office, Commissioner Koskinen has stonewalled, obstructed, and flat-out lied to the Congress, the elected representatives of his bosses: us. His arrogance in several hearings I’ve watched has just been astounding. If not impeachment, he certainly deserves a pie in the face.

Long-time readers of this blog (all two of you) will recall that I often called for the impeachment of former Attorney General Eric Holder and that I believe Barack Obama merits impeachment and removal from office. Partly because their malfeasance and incompetence in office (1) deserve it, but also to restore some respect for Congress’ role as the representatives of the people and the states. Congress has been so reluctant to impeach and remove officials who abuse their power that it has contributed to the decline of the legislature’s status as a co-equal branch and the rise of “Crown government.” Along with denying funds, impeachment is the only weapon Congress has to hold the Executive to account.

Make no mistake, however: as the article points out, removing even a minor wretch like Mr. Koskinen will be difficult. Other than judges, Congress has gone after Executive Branch officials only twice: Grant’s Secretary of War and President Clinton, himself. Removing Koskinen requires 67 senators voting to convict, which means several Democrats would have to turn against the Obama White House, which appointed him. Ain’t gonna happen.

However, putting this malicious bureaucrat on trial would be a small first step on the road toward restoring Congress’ authority by asserting its institutional and constitutional prerogatives. In other words, you abuse your power, you get your power taken away from you.

Those of us who’ve followed the story of the attack by al Qaeda affiliates on our post in Benghazi, resulting in the deaths of four Americans, including the Ambassador, have known all along that Hillary Clinton was lying about what she did and knew that night, and in her public statements afterwards. Whether about the causes of the attack, or her concern for security in Benghazi, or about what she did that night, Hillary Clinton has stonewalled Congress and dissembled –lied– to the American people, all to protect, first, Barack Obama’s reelection and then her own chances at the presidency.

One of the big questions concerns her efforts from the night of the attack, itself, and for another 10-11 days to blame the catastrophe on an obscure YouTube video made by an Islam-hating Coptic Egyptian and minor crook living in the US. The man was rousted by Orange County, CA, Sheriff’s Department on a ticky-tack parole violation and he spent about a year in jail, in fear of his life from Muslim retaliation, his First Amendment rights curb-stomped by this administration, including Hillary Clinton.

Even more appalling, just a few days after the attack and when the bodies were being returned to the US, Clinton stood before the families of the dead and promised the US would “get” the guy who made that video. She said this to their faces, in personal conversation.

Few paying attention gave the video explanation any credence, but, we now know, thanks to her appearance before the Benghazi committee yesterday, that she knew that night that it was a terrorist attack, yet she chose to lie:

Here’s what the Benghazi committee found in Thursday’s hearing. Two hours into Mrs. Clinton’s testimony, Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan referred to an email Mrs. Clinton sent to her daughter, Chelsea, at 11:12 the night of the attack, or 45 minutes after the secretary of state had issued a statement blaming YouTube-inflamed mobs. Her email reads: “Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an Al Queda-like group.” Mrs. Clinton doesn’t hedge in the email; no “it seems” or “it appears.” She tells her daughter that on the anniversary of 9/11 an al Qaeda group assassinated four Americans.

That same evening, Mrs. Clinton spoke on the phone with Libyan President Mohamed Magariaf, around 8 p.m. The notes from that conversation, in a State Department email, describe her as saying: “We have asked for the Libyan government to provide additional security to the compound immediately as there is a gun battle ongoing, which I understand Ansar as Sharia [sic] is claiming responsibility for.” Ansar al Sharia is al Qaeda’s affiliate on the Arabian Peninsula. So several hours into the attack, Mrs. Clinton already believed that al Qaeda was attacking U.S. facilities.

The next afternoon, Mrs. Clinton had a call with the Egyptian Prime Minister Hesham Kandil. The notes from it are absolutely damning. The secretary of state tells him: “We know that the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack—not a protest.” And yet Mrs. Clinton, and Ms. Rice and Mr. Obama for days and days continued to spin the video lie.

She could tell her daughter the truth, but not the American people, not even the parents of the dead. She not only withheld the truth, she absolutely lied to them.

This is not a Republican or Democrat issue, nor is it a conservative, liberal, libertarian, or progressive “talking point.” This isn’t a case where reasonable people can disagree over policy and call it a draw.

No, this is an issue of character. Of personality. Of ethics and morals. Of not just one person’s qualifications to hold public office, but their fundamental worthiness to do so.

Hillary Rodham Clinton has shown she has no sense of duty or honor, nor even any personal decency. Nothing beyond the raw need to protect herself and her dream. It is as plain as the noses on all our faces that she would act the same way, should she become president. She would be Dick Nixon in a pants suit, but without the competence. No one, but no one who cares about the United States and, indeed, the world, should ever vote to put this loathsome creature in the Oval Office.

I’ve often referred to Hillary as “Lady Macbeth” in the past for her obvious, ruthless lust for power. Somewhere in the afterlife, Shakespeare smiles grimly: he knew her type all too well.

While everyone focuses on just what Hillary did when she routed all her (classified, top secret) work emails through an unsecure private email server, the question left hanging is just how much damage was done to our national security by having our secrets left in the open like laundry on the line.

I’ve assumed any intelligence service worth its pay –especially, but not exclusively, those of our enemies– was of course reading these communications. But Stanley Kurtz points out the harm done even if no one did:

“There’s a widely held belief among American counterspies that foreign intelligence agencies had to be reading the e-mails on Hillary’s private server, particularly since it was wholly unencrypted for months….senior counterintelligence officials are assuming the worst about what the Russians and Chinese know.”

So America’s intelligence agencies are assuming that every communication of America’s Secretary of State for months or more was read by our adversaries. Isn’t that likely to amount to one of the worst intelligence breaches in American history? And here’s the kicker. Even if we got lucky and the Russians and Chinese didn’t actually intercept some or all of Hillary’s e-mails, our intelligence agencies now have to behave as if they did.

Doesn’t that mean that we are now making massive changes to the sources and methods of our intelligence? Are we now withdrawing valuable agents? Are we trying to replace methods that cannot be easily replicated? Are we now forced to rebuild a good deal of our intelligence capabilities from the ground up? Are we not suffering tremendous intelligence damage right now, regardless of what foreign intelligence services did or did not manage to snatch from Hillary’s server—simply because we are forced to assume that they got it all?

The extent of this train wreck will itself be secret: that’s the nature of intelligence work — you don’t want your enemy to know you know how much they know.

But the fact itself that we have to go through all this because of her sense of entitlement and her miserable judgment should be enough for any reasonable person to disqualify her from ever holding another office, let alone the presidency.

I’ve been doing my best to explain the complex intelligence realities behind Hillary Clinton’s on-going #EmailGate scandal for months now, and we’re still far from the end of this messy saga.

Hillary’s take on what happened with her State Department “unclassified” email and her “private” server has see-sawed with the customary Clintonian lawyerly evasions, untruths, and now something approaching half-truths.

First it was: everything done was legal and acceptable.

Then came: mistakes were perhaps made, but not by me, and I’m not apologizing.

Followed by: the inevitable Clintonian sorry-not-sorry.

Now, having seen her polls dropping in rock-like fashion, we’re at: I’m kinda sorry but still nothing I emailed was “marked” classified.

The last is a particularly dishonest evasion, given that the Intelligence Community has twicedetermined that in fact TOPSECRET//SCI information was included in Hillary’s “private” email on at least two occasions. Given that’s from a sample of just forty…

Hillary Clinton on Tuesday apologized for the scandal surrounding her private State Department email server, and said in a new interview with ABC News that she takes full responsibility.

Using an unauthorized and unsecured email server “was a mistake. I’m sorry about that. I take responsibility,” she told David Muir in a “World News Tonight” interview that will air later this week.

Clinton’s apology marked a sharp departure from when she said earlier this month that she owes no apology for using a private email server when she worked the top position at State.

Let’s be honest about this: they only reason Lady Macbeth is apologizing is that she has seen her “inevitable” march to the White House crippled by a poorly run campaign and a scandal that would have anyone else facing a judge in federal court. She got in front of the cameras with Muir because her poll numbers among Democrats have collapsed 15-20 points since July. In survey groups these days, the word most commonly associated with her is “liar.” Apologize? She’s so desperate, I’m surprised she didn’t go on her knees to Canossa.

Clinton said she used the personal email account for convenience and did not give the issue much thought when she started her job as secretary of state.

“I was not thinking a lot when I got in. There was so much work to be done. We had so many problems around the world. I didn’t really stop and think what kind of email system will there be,” she said.

Just what we need, America: a Chief Executive who doesn’t think a lot…

But, to answer my question above, no, this does not make everything better.

Let’s forget her lack of sincerity. She’s about as sincere as her husband was when he denied having sex “with that woman.” She’s taking “responsibility” while expecting not to be held responsible. No one except the most die-hard Clinton droid will believe she means a word of this or is willing to be held accountable for serious violations of federal law. Her hope is that an act of public contrition, no matter how pro forma, will be enough to start defusing this scandal.

Well, it isn’t. The information she allowed to be placed on that unsecure server includes some of the most sensitive national-security secrets of the United States, which by law people of her rank in the government are expected to recognize and handle appropriately. But, instead of using the approved government email system, she had her own private server to, I assume, kept her doings away from pesky FOIA requests. If you or I had done anything remotely similar, we would have gone through “interrogation Hell” until we cried for our mommies and then were hauled into court. And you can bet your last dollar that the Russians, the Chinese, and any foreign intelligence agency worth their salt read everything on her server. They would have to be incompetent not to.